Oklahoma Turnpike Authority; requiring Oklahoma Turnpike Authority obtain legislative approval to increase toll rates; requiring Authority to adopt certain rules; effective date.
HB3309 would substantially change how the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority (OTA) sets tolls, finances projects, and accounts for project revenues. The bill requires the OTA to obtain legislative approval by joint resolution before increasing toll rates, and it directs the agency to adopt rules creating segregated accounting and reporting for each turnpike or project, including separate operating, reserve, and sinking funds and annual public reporting of revenues, expenditures, and debt service by project.
The bill also limits how future turnpike debt may be structured. For bonds issued after November 1, 2026, the OTA could secure bonds only with revenues from the specific turnpike or project being financed, and it could not pledge revenues from one project to support another. Refunding bonds issued on or after that date would likewise be limited to the project whose bonds are being refunded. The bill further requires that, once a project’s debt is paid off, tolls on that project be limited to the direct costs of operation, maintenance, and long-term preservation, rather than continuing at higher levels to subsidize other projects.
HB3309 would amend multiple sections of Title 69 governing the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority, especially the agency’s powers, toll-setting authority, revenue bond financing, toll continuation after debt retirement, and refunding bonds. It would add new statutory sections requiring legislative approval for toll increases and mandating project-by-project accounting and reporting. For bonds and refunding bonds issued after the bill’s effective date, it would prohibit cross-collateralization of revenues among projects and require separate accounts for each project, while expressly preserving existing bond contracts and trust agreements issued before November 1, 2026.
The bill’s apparent sentiment is strongly reform-oriented and oversight-focused, reflecting concern about toll increases, transparency, and the use of turnpike revenues. Although no committee transcript or recorded vote is provided, the caption and text indicate a policy push to give the Legislature direct control over toll hikes and to prevent the OTA from using revenues from one project to support another. The bill’s structure suggests support from lawmakers seeking greater accountability and limits on the Authority’s financial flexibility.
The main points of contention are likely to be legislative control versus agency autonomy, and project-specific financing versus system-wide revenue management. Supporters would likely favor requiring legislative approval for toll increases, segregated accounts, and limits on cross-subsidization to improve transparency and protect motorists from broad toll burdens. Opponents may argue that these restrictions could reduce the OTA’s ability to manage debt efficiently, finance new projects, and respond quickly to changing costs or bond market conditions. The bill also preserves preexisting obligations, signaling an attempt to avoid impairing current bondholders while still changing future financing rules.